162. I am sure there are men- a very small minority- who *never* look at porn, naked pictures, etc.

For purposes of visual arousal, etc.

However, that sliver of population is undoubtedly dwarfed by the number of men who will happily lie about something they think is none of someone else's damn business, particularly if they know the lie will prevent them from having to endure a finger-wagging lecture.

126. ?

Playboy showed much more than breasts in the late '70s (I grew up then and snuck more than my share of peeks of the magazine). They airbrushed everything and put a glossiness to their photos that made the images highly idealized, but they definitely showed everything. I think the '60s Playboys may have been more suggestive than revealing, but I'm not as familiar with those.

111. So a nude female body breeds misogyny?

If a liberated woman chooses to be nude for cameras, or in public (and I have several friends who do) they are expressing themselves freely, but if anyone sees them, they don't respect women?

I really do get what you're saying. There are women who are exploited by pornography. But there are also women who model in the nude, and feel like this is their form of artistic expression. Meanwhile, their pictures are considered to be porn by many.

Pictures that actually are porn sometimes look very much like my friends' nude photos.

Every week I go to a live figure drawing session with a nude model (sometimes male, sometimes female). There are people who would call this pornography (and they do).

It's not as black and white as you want it to be.

Also, your post assumed that only women are objects of porn. Can't young men be exploited?

163. Yes, because sex is bad.

62. You thought Playboy was VULGAR?

You've never been married? If so, did you only have relations with your while wearing footsie pajamas in a pitch black room? I could see someone thinking Penthouse being "vulgar," as has always been much more hardcore than Playboy. But if you think Playboy is vulgar, you could never see the great fountains in Europe, or tour the Museum of fine art. Wow.

But I guess it's kind of moot, as you do admit that even you have "consumed" pornography.

83. There is a difference between art and exploitation.

Wow, yet another armchair psychiatrist who knows everything about me, even better than I know myself.

I have good reason to show women, all women, the respect they deserve, and that extends to avoiding the product of an industry that is notorious for predatory practices including forced prostitution and under aged sex workers.

I grew up in a household where I watched my father abuse my mother every day possible for decades, emotionally, physically, sexually. Also my older sisters to a somewhat lesser extent, and me to a great extent because he had a special hatred of me.

When you can tell me that at age 7 you watched a man hold the blade of a hunting knife against his wife's throat just enough to draw a drop or two of blood for what seemed like an eternity of 10 or 15 minutes while telling her she needed to "confess" to him the vivid details of sex acts with the dozens of non-existent "lovers" he believed she entertained in their bed daily while he was at work, something he conjured up in a very sick mind, we can talk about why I respect women enough to never act like my father did in any way. And that extends to avoiding the products put out by an industry that brutalizes many women ensnared in it.

I had to pick up the pieces of my family after decades of extreme abuse, which was hard not only because I observed it, but because I was a victim of it as well. When I was young, I observed numerous examples of deviant sexual behavior by my father, things I won't go into. Later, I had the pleasure of being pinned down quite a few times at the business end of a loaded rifle or shotgun while he berated me, my supposed lack of masculinity, his belief that I was gay, and his general extreme hatred of me. It was a fine way for a teenage boy to live, but I knew even then how wrong these patterns of behavior are, and I vowed to do everything possible to runaway from that pattern and live in a way that would let me look in the mirror and know I am a good man.

Art is art, I've spent plenty of time in museums and enough time taking art history to recognize the difference between healthy expression of human sexuality and exploitation. Is all porn the product of exploitative practices, most likely not. Is it easy to tell the difference? Probably not. Better to avoid it all IMHO.

So,,yeah, yuck it up and feel superior, see if I give a rat's ass. I know who I am and what I stand for.

84. .

my nieces BF feels the same as you, and it has to do with his father. he wont talk about it. but he is very clear on how he feels about it. he will not allow that shit in his life. he also refuses to interact with his father.

124. A hug for you, Den, and thanks for standing up.

138. Hope you've never hired a housing contractor...

While the guys who came to your house were probably well paid and liked what they were doing, the "industry" certain exploits unskilled, undocumented day laborors with low wages, no benefits and weak safety rules, and we certainly can't make distinctions, can we?

142. I think you're a classy guy.

145. I agree that he's a "classy guy."

He went through some serious shit in his life, obviously has a different outlook.

Consider what I just posted...he has a different outlook.

He had to deal with stuff most of us could never imagine.

But does that mean EVERY SINGLE PERSON should have that same reaction? I'm can only feel deep sympathy and concern for what our DU brother went through. But I don't agree that because one particular person dealt with horrible experiences in his life means that every other person must internalize those experiences.

I did NOT experience anything like what the OP posted. I've had my issues, but nothing like that. So what is the conclusion? Because some people have had bad sexual experiences, ALL sexual experiences must be stopped? No porn, no PG Rated Playboy nudies? Seriously? I appreciate our DU friend's experiences. That doesn't mean we ALL must hate on the human figure.

147. I think the solution is to let adults judge for themselves and to respect everyone's choices.

I'm a pretty strong believer in allowing adults to watch whatever they want to watch in the privacy of their own homes. But we also need to respect the opinions of those who don't like porn.

Just as with religion, true freedom means that you can choose it or reject it. But the trend on the internet lately, and especially on DU, is that porn must not be criticized. I find this attitude silly and defensive. Porn isn't for everyone. It almost certainly is harmful for some. For others, it may be harmless. For still others, it might provide a little extra spark that helps keep their relationships interesting.

But the people who do not like it deserve as much respect as those who do. Their opinions are just as valid.

160. I think I need to apologize, too.

Short fuse is a pretty apt term for me these days, too. Sorry for that.

I didn't mean to imply that everyone should do as I do, regarding porn or anything in life. All we can do is make educated decisions. My issue with porn isn't sexuality, I'm as much of a "regular guy" as anyone else. My concern is with the conditions in that industry - I avoid it for the very same reason I refuse to shop at Wal-mart, predatory and exploitive business practices towards their workers.

164. Peace!

I think your post made many valid points -- we all come from different places, after all. I didn't take your post for "anger," we're all entitled to our opinions, and our opinions are based upon our experiences. Don't think for a minute that you didn't open my eyes a bit. I hope I didn't sound like a total assh*le!

151. *just hugs n/t

153. My partner

is 50 and feels the same. He is an artist, too, and a feminist. He thinks porn is stupid and boring. He would much rather put his mental energy into art-making. I actually know a few guys that have never watched porn or looked at girly mags. One is a composer, one a scientist, one another artist. All very cool guys.

180. Wow

Thank you for your philosophy on porn.

Funny how people who love even the most violent porn and want no restrictions on its consumption - no matter how awful the conditions for the "actors" - will jump on you and make you feel wrong for making the choice NOT to consume it.

Then tell you because you saw a PLayboy at 15, you are JUST LIKE all the people who live and breathe to consume it every day of their lives.

They want "live and let live" for themselves, but they reserve the right to judge YOU as deficient or not normal because you don't do the same things THEY do.

It's a strange world we live in. I am sorry for your experiences, and I thank you for being brave enough to speak for yourself against the tide of people who want everyone to be JUST LIKE THEY ARE in regards to porn.

Some of us have a lot more regard for human life than others. That's all. And no one will change my mind about that.

If you can only get off watching people being raped and abused, screaming, bleeding, getting called vile names, I don't think you have much regard for human life.

I have no probelm with erotica, or even video of sexual acts, but the violent, deviant shit is for losers.

93. What is that even supposed to mean?

That I only avoided it because of lack of opportunity, rather than lack of interest?

I have some pretty deeply held beliefs about the ills of the sex industry. My right to believe what I want and stand up for my beliefs. Which includes not supporting an exploitative industry which often brutalizes and abuses the women caught up in it.

I don't drink, either, as a result of a family tragedy, where the family watched my uncle linger in ICU and then die weeks later after being hit by a drunk driver. 33 year old cop with a wife and five kids. So, does that mean something is wrong with me because I don't go out and get stupid drunk and behave like an ass then puke off the bender the next day?

So, yeah, no porn, no booze must make me a loser in the eyes of the herd. I guess I should get a role model like Charlie Sheen and learn how to live the good life, eh?

92. Delayed ejaculation is a dysfunction? nt

119. Yes. Some of us women like to see our partners get off too.

As a connoisseur of many men, I had a couple who never did ejaculate or come.

I felt sorry for them. An hour later and they were still trying work it out while I was done. I thrill when men come - if I can work it out and come with, what a blast. But the sooner or later, if a man can't manage a climax I couldn't sustain the "motion" if you will and had to call it quits.

Its as bad for women when a man doesn't have a climax, as it is (presumably) for a man when a woman doesn't climax during sex.

208. Doesn't bother me.

'course, I don't know if I'm an ardent lover of porn. I am a realist, though, and the realist in me says that consenting adults watching other consenting adults screw is not a big deal, and in most cases, a relatively healthy way to relieve stress.

As for the allegedly squeam-inducing woman upthread, my advice to her would be to tell her lover to knock it off (you know, "it") for a few days, or a week... not because "porn is bad" but because sometimes waiting can be fun.

213. The poster of whom you speak

I just find it hilarious that SOME guys can watch all kinds of sexual activity and not have a problem with IMAGES, but when we start having an adult conversation using WORDS, suddenly they become prudes extraordinaire.

"Ooh. Ooh. A Gurl is talking about SEX! Cover your ears, boys! We don't really care to KNOW how women feel about their sexual experiences!" Jayzuss, the immaturity boggles the mind.

And NO I am not talking about YOU, so don't go off on a tear demanding an apology.....

Edit to add: Of course, it's subtle, but "objects" shouldn't talk, should they? They should be passive and silent and have no opinions about the "male domain" of sex. THIS is what is hilarious to me, but also rather sad in another way.

222. As I said before, every thing said is not about you

Making observations on a post does not mean I am making those observations about you specifically.

I am speaking what I see as some attitudes here, and IRL, and having some fun, as much as you make loony posts about all the Victorians roaming these parts, and babbling about "usual suspects" and such.

I normally don't enter these debates, because it's exhausting fighting all the strawmen, and their able creators.

224. Oh, im happy to elaborate on that usual suspects thing.

Its interesting that one argument floated about "defensiveness" is, "YUR just like the paranoid gun people!!!!" Ha, no.

For one, you know what? If someone had recently walked into a school and killed 26 people in rapid succession with a DVD of Rocco Does Prague, you're damn right I would be like, okay i am amenable to a discussion on regulating this. But it wouldnt happen- because guns, specifically AR 15s and attendant high capacity ammo clips, are designed for one purpose only- to kill large numbers of humans in a short period of time.

Conversely, Porn - by and for consenting adults, mind you - is a relatively benign diversion for millions, and a stress reliever. And the objections aren't based in science so much as morality and authoritarianism. As such, the "arguments" don't mirror so much the gun debate as the marijuana one. Even down to the "its so much worse than what you used to smoke" tack.

You yourself admit that you're not familiar with the material you claim to be concerned about, but are relying on hearsay and anecdote about how "its so terrible now".

So, yeah, about those usual suspects and my supposed imagination regarding the real agenda? They were against that "better" 70s porn, too. And the 80s. Like the pot war, its always a "much worse crisis now" and as such requires we "do something".

If you ask for a specific example of a graphic visual depiction of a penetrative hetero sex act, or even a naked picture of an attractive woman that a hetero man might get turned on by, that would not "objectifying" and "problematic" and even (here's the kicker) "porn", guess what? THERE ARENT ANY.

The bottom line is, the one umbrella definition of "porn" that constitutes objectionable material? ...anything a hetero man might get turned on by. Period.

99. As we used to say, publish or perish! Hence, there's a lot of crap out there by refuted experts. n/t

13. Start with the fact that ...

...every man who has ever been to a friend's bachelor party has been exposed to porn whether he wanted to be or not. I even remember a bachelor party back before the invention of VHS video tape when one guy brought a 8mm movie projector, folding screen, and a pile of black and white, silent 8mm porn films. And yes, they were just as raunchy and explicit as modern porn. Plus, that kind of porn was illegal back then, which made it even more "exciting".

64. Who is "they"?

"They" have defined porn a lot of different ways. Which scene in which movies "counts" depends entirely on who is doing the defining. After all, in the Arab world they consider Lady's Home Journal obscene because it shows women with arms naked, even above the elbow! How shocking!

174. I'm a Male Who Kinda Likes The Stories

So does my wife, and we watch them together. It's all in good fun/times. Wank porn (no story) porn can be okay too, but I prefer there to be some other level of interaction (even if it is often horribly cheesy).

16. Men in their 20's who grew up with the Internet? Probably not

17. "If porn had impact many claim, you'd just have to show hetero films to a homosexual to change his"

Lajeunesse seems to have an agenda regarding porn and it's effect. Frankly, I don't think much of what I've found regarding his research or conclusions.

Here is a really stupid comment he makes trying to attack those who criticize porn:

Lajeunesse refutes the perverse effect often attributed to pornography. "Aggressors don't need pornography to be violent and addicts can be addicted to drugs, alcohol, gaming and asocial cases are pathological. If pornography had the impact that many claim it has, you would just have to show heterosexual films to a homosexual to change his sexual orientation."

186. I haven't seen anyone giving men a hard time for *not* watching porn, personally.

What I do see, occasionally, is the "don't watch porn, porn harms, watching porn is not progressive" crowd poke their heads up to deliver the occasional anti-porn tirade, upon which the large numbers of people who do watch porn and don't think it's a big deal promptly weigh in and say "um, there's nothing 'not progressive' about consenting adults getting off on watching other consenting adults fuck".

I am glad we agree that no one should judge others for their choices around consenting adult porn- whether that be to NOT look at it, or TO look at it.

193. They're understandably defensive ... so they project.

They know the majority of porn is degrading, and that many of the actors used are exploited if not abused or even raped. And a few (hopefully just a few) enjoy the humiliation and abuse. They get off on it.

So they pathetically claim that any man who says he doesn't consume porn is simply lying. It's sad, really. Pitiful.

195. I don't know about the majority of porn

because I don't need porn to get off. I haven't seen a porn flick in years. I have a great imagination. But I have heard the horror stories of what is called "porn" these days, and I have read and listened to the testimony of those who have been horrifically exploited so someone else can get their jollies.

I do enjoy looking at pictures of nude men, even though the porn-masters claim I should only get off reading romance novels and that "women are not visually stimulated by sexual imagery." LOL what a crock when MEN say this! They fool themselves into thinking only women need to be attractive and "sexy."

If the only way I could get off is by seeing men being beaten and raped and violently degraded ( not talking about consensual lite stuff, but actual torture of another human ), and if there was even the slightest hint that these "actors" were truly being harmed, I would worry about myself. But the people who DO enjoy this sexual stimulation seem to be more worried about those of us who DON'T need to see anyone degraded violently, than whether or not they are having orgasms while watching another human being abused.

It's absolutely HORRIFYING to them, I suppose, when they realize we don't all need to watch people being gang-raped in order to have an orgasm. Then they must ask themselves why they DO need this type of imagery to get off.

214. Oh, boy

I think a lot of men would be surprised how often women masturbate, as SHOCKING as that may seem!

Oh, wait. It's 2013, but most of us women are just CLUELESS about sex. We're too busy wearing our pearls and high heels and baking pies. Silly us! So we shouldn't have any opinions about it, and we NEVER touch ourselves. SEX belongs to BOYZ. Why do I keep fergettin' that?

Gawd your post made me lol. I like reality, though, and I know a lot of REAL women who love sex and talk openly about it, not these June Cleaver types you seem to know. Maybe you need to get out more...

218. It's an unwinnable debate if your opponent

makes assumptions about you based on your gender.

Women of our generation still heard that "sex is awful evil and you should save it for someone you love" crap, but then we got Cosmo and lots of sex advice. I read about JOng's "zipless fuck" in her book on a plane when I was sixteen.

And most of the young women I know are even more empowered to want good sex. They have no problems discussing their sexuality.

But for some reason, a great number of men around our age are stuck in some time warp. They enjoy telling us we are "clueless about sex" as a way of shaming, like we are all their mothers or something. We should take their unasked for advice cuz they is teh experts on all things sexual!

We should enjoy and embrace the males' sexuality, according to these types, but we shouldn't expect that we would actually KNOW anything about sex ourselves. GAWD forbid we should talk about it, because some guys can view porn 24/7, but can't seem to handle an actual conversation about sexuality. Which seems to imply they feel some "ownership" of human sexuality.

Of course, an object knows nothing and is silent, passive, so they reinforce what we are saying while remaining clueless to their own harmful stereotypes.

237. I don't see a conspiracy, I've just been on DU for 9 years and I know the drill.

Here's an example, though, that pertains to you and your responses; upthread you complained, to no one really, that a "TMI" answer to a woman complaining about an excessively-delayed orgasmic man, meant that "men cant handle women talking about sex" and "we dont understand that women have desires and orgasms, too"

Then i weighed in that, personally, the conversation doesn't bug me, and my advice - to the woman's partner, mind you - was to give his system a few days down time..

Well, anyway, somehow THAT response was unacceptable too, and somehow simultaneously indicated that I dont understand women blah blah blah and how dare I offer advice.

Classic cant win: the guy who says TMI, he's out of line for not engaging and being uptight about the discussion. Guy engages the discussion, THAT is out of line too.

Which brings me to the bottom line- I haven't been the one throwing out personal attacks on peoples' sexuality (despite SB's constant refrain about "they use womens sexuality to attack them lol lol") these personal attacks have been coming at me, not from me.

Im not really sure what any of it is based on, but it's not based on anything I have actually said, here.

Ps, i dont know you, so you calling me "dear" is probably an inappropriate level of familiarity. Just FYI.

Masturbation can be good for the over-50s
Removal of toxins built up over a lifetime reduces the risk of prostate cancer

Masturbation may be good for you – or bad, depending on your age. The solitary sexual activity that is widely practised but little discussed, is linked with an increased risk of prostate cancer when practised frequently by young men in their twenties and thirties, doctors say.

But by the time men reach their fifties, it may protect against the disease because it helps remove toxins that have built up over a lifetime.

~ snip ~

"One theory is that during the early years the prostate gland is more susceptible to hormonal changes and is still developing. As men age and accumulate toxins from the diet or through their lungs , sexual activity may help release them. Studies have found toxins in the semen and the fluid produced in the prostate. As you age it is more important to flush them out."

36. I read the OP, and before I even finished, the question I had was,

What is porn? Define porn. Is it the Sports Illustrated, Swimsuit edition? A Ridged tool Calender? A picture taken at the local swimming pool last summer? A Renaissance painting? Why or why not?
Or are we talking about those intimate, home made, "love" videos, or maybe 'the credit card required', Internet downloads?
DU has even had the un-draped human form posted and left alone.

What is porn in the first place? Ask a thousand people and you will get at least 1250 different responses.
I'm sure most women like to be reminded how evil, dirty, obscene and repugnant their bodies are.
Oh, and just for the record, I think they are Righteous.

47. Did a quick Google

Yup. They're still there. I also remember those pinup calenders in gas stations where you could lift the transparent cover to remove the lady's bikini. You had to be quick, while the no one was looking.

100. K&R! Porn, BFD to me, unless someone is being exploited. n/t

122. Exactly.

What's done by consenting adults for money is far less risky then say professional gambling or on the less legal side, drug dealing.

It's not a big deal if done properly.

And people will say oh but it objectifies X Y and Z. That is in regards to a particular instance not the industry. There is perfectly good porn that doesn't objectify. No sense in throwing the baby out with the bath water.

48. research shows women are as much if not more so cause their sexuality is more fluid.

It is considered an almost forgone conclusion across research disciplines, among pop psychologists of all stripes, and in the general population that men are more “visual” than women when it comes to the way they get turned on. Men, we’re told, are visually aroused, whereas women just need a good sense of humor, and possibly a strong jaw, and they're on board.

This misguided, but pervasive belief can be linked to a host of other gender stereotypes which are further complicated by sexual politics and differences in social power. So arguments which should be challenged, such as the “fact” that men leer more than women do, that they objectify women’s bodies more than women do men’s bodies, and that they just can’t stop watching porn, are explained as somehow being related to a mix of genetics, patriarchy, and simple mindedness. Challenging these ideas can be a monumental task. Researcher bias being what it is, science rarely offers support for these "counter-intuitive" ideas. What's worse, when research does start to complicate matters, the media, and even smart bloggers who should know better, distort the findings beyond recognition.

*

The study, carried out by researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis measured brainwave activity of 264 women as they viewed a series of 55 color slides that contained various scenes from water skiers to snarling dogs to partially-clad couples in sensual poses. The researchers were interested in the speed, strength, and location of brainwave activity of the subjects as they viewed erotic versus non-erotic images.

As they hypothesized, the brainwave activity of participants was markedly different when viewing erotic images versus non-erotic images. But a finding they didn’t expect was that female participant’s response was similar to men. In a prepared statement, lead author Andrey P. Anokhin explained:

"Usually men subjectively rate erotic material much higher than women," he says. "So based on those data we would expect lower responses in women, but that was not the case. Women have responses as strong as those seen in men."

128. Uh oh

these days my brainwaves would probably be the same for water skiers, snarling dogs, or partially clad couples....

You see so many partially clad people these days it's kind of It's gotten to the point that if I'm watching a movie, I get something to drink during sex scenes. I honestly skip over the sex scenes in books. What I'm saying is, they're so predictable. It's a case of the big goal being anti-climactical LOL.

No judgment here--I don't care what other people do. Just saying, some of us are bored by the pix and prefer the experience.

129. so true.

i read tons of books. can only read so many sex scenes before a big yawn. now, when flipping thru pages, hubby says... more sex. meh...

i just do not watch tv much. i am so fuckin tired of rape for entertainment in so many movies or stripper/prostitute heart of gold scenario that entertain men so, that seems to have to be in every guy flick.

130. Yeah

you don't see many movies where the woman (or female sexuality) is portrayed realistically. In fact I can't think of even one right now...and of course there are not many movies where a woman is the protagonist that men would go to see. So it's always a male perspective.

134. marions ghost, what is really sad is i do not know

that it is necessarily the mens perspective, but more what our culture is conditioning and feeding the men, that is their perspective. i know that hubby has so reduced what he watches now also cause he is fuckin sick and tired of the crap.

he has said to me with his computer games, football he watches, and shows, that he does not want that crap in them either.

so, i wonder how many men they are turning off. he is much more adamant about what is coming into our house now a days than i am. i try to be fair and so dont say anything about some stuff. he says, nope, dont like it.

i think that is why much of this is a rape "culture". it is not what we are, but what we are being conditioned with to become.

135. Agree --

the conditioning is so pervasive we don't really know what men (or women) would be like if they didn't absorb it so easily. We ARE what we SEE. For sure.

I understand & to your hubby for his discipline about what he watches. Junk in, junk out --I say.

My SO watches cooking shows or documentary while others watch sports. He would be an outlier, I suspect. Not that there's anything basically wrong with sports--it's just the nacho (I meant to say macho) climate. Don't need nachos either LOL.

94. and in other news, The Sky Is Blue and Fish Swim..

95. We used to watch porn in college...

for the entertainment value. I remember watching "Taboo 2" in a room with 15 people, and nine were women.

The best part I still remember: this guy's "daughter" was trying to feel him up and get him in bed, but he turned her down. Afterwards, he's standing in his smoking jacket with a glass of scotch and uttered the immortal line, "I don't know whether to cry or get a hard-on."

113. "All" is not a very scientific word.

Yes our species has advanced to the point that we are so self-aware that we do not consider ourselves a "species". However, we are still as predictable when it comes to drive to reproduce, protect young, etc as everything else on the planet.

I hate to be the lazy DUer, but I have a pork butt in the crockpot that needs pulling, so I don't have time to dig into this. What definition of "pornography" are they using? I see they mention exposure at 10 years old. Are they talking about Playboy, which is breasts and non-graphic angles of female genitalia, or are they talking about a 10 year old watching full intercourse?

Too many variables for me to take this seriously, but even without a study, I would say the percentage of males (including asexuals) who have had the access to look at human intercourse for one reason or another....is closer to 100% than it is to 90%.

175. BLASPHEMY!!!!

121. They are counting whoever saw any of it at all, ever

I've seen some of it. So I'd count too if they were counting women. But only a couple of times. So it would not be good to conclude anything from that. It's out there, most people will see it eventually.

146. I work at a residence with men and women between ages 20-26

They have access to the internet and thus have had access to porn for longer than I've been there, which is +18 months. Recently, the directors decided to block "dangerous" sites, but the uproar from the residents was such that they unblocked the porn the next day.

My point is that the complaints were split evenly between the young men and young women. Both argued that if they couldn't have sex in the residence, it wasn't fair for them to be deprived of porn since sex was a big part of this developmental stage.

Does the response of the young women surprise anyone? or are you all just wondering, "WTF kind of residence do you work at?"

155. Duh! Next study: All humans breathe air.

Every man has seen porn at LEAST once in his life.
And no porn isn't just the official videos & magazines out there.
There's also half-porn & quarter-porn like the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit issue, Maxim magazine, Smooth magazine, King magazine...
... and even stuff like Cosmopolitan magazine & the Victoria's Secret catalogue.

Ask Moe Szyslak from The Simpsons & he'll show you the titillation of the JC Penney's catalogue. Hahahaha!

Don't forget shows like Baywatch with girls running around in bikinis & swimsuits.

Any media that can titillate & arouse is pretty much pornography.
There's just different levels of it. Some of it even with clothes on.
Some may not be EXPRESSLY designed to for this purpose but sexuality is used to sell the product so the effect is the same.

Pornography or better yet Sexual Depictions are NATURAL and HEALTHY.
You cannot deny the sex drive.
You may not agree with a certain depiction & that's fair but no one is EVER gonna get rid of porn.
The World Wide Web wouldn't exist without porn.
As soon as photography was invented there were people taking sexual pictures, nude shots.
There's sculptures of fertility goddesses & gods showing sexual body parts.
Drawings on cave walls of sexual images.

In fact, I'll go so far to say that a man who denies ever looking at porn is a suspicious individual.
There's even textual porn & you see this a lot in women's "romance novels".
Porn is extremely diverse & wide-ranging. It's everywhere!

I'm not sure why they wanted to run a study like this.
Looking for that rare needle in the haystack perhaps?
John Lucas

187. Consenting adults, that's the reasonable yardstick.

I like movies, doesn't mean I like "Navy Seals", or "Howard the Duck". I like books, that doesn't mean I like Ann Coulter's latest screed, or "Twilight".

Goofy, broad generalizations, often driven by an agenda, serve no one- especially on a subject like "porn", which can encompass anything from a Raquel Welch centerfold in Playboy to the... well, whatever material you're referencing in your post.

The desperate attempt to shame people for what is a natural desire- and yes, looking at and appreciating and being visually stimulated by attractive naked people of the gender one is attracted to, as well as being turned on by watching attractive people screw, is natural-that is what is ridiculous and hyperbolic, nevermind that it crops up here like a weird mushroom every 6 months or so.

191. I don't see any desperate attempts to shame anybody

except those on this thread who are incredulous - INCREDULOUS I tells ya - to learn that all men are not just like they are.

Some people don't like any porn, some like some porn, some losers watch the most vile porn and think that's normal human sexuality. It's a curve like anything else.

Consenting adults is the key.

But the exploitive nature of some porn is disgusting to a lot of people, and it is their right to be disgusted. The video of the girl who was gang-raped in Steubenville is "acceptable porn" to some people, and that's just SICK.

And also, it amazes me how childish some men are who consume porn. A woman upthread answers a question and discusses sex, and it seemed to scare the living bejeezuss out of the guy she answered.

This suggests some sort of idea that women shouldn't really like or discuss sex because it just ruins some men's day to openly TALK about sex. They have some pathology where only sex in secret, locked in their mother's basement with their computers and their Kleenex, is "real sex."

194. It's typical defensiveness.

Intellectualy dishonest BS is what it is. It's clear the only "shaming" is from men so desperate to silence anyone who doesn't march in lockstep with the PRON IS TEH AWESUM mantra.

Look at the discussion of reasonable health protection in the production of porn. The hair-on-fire reactions include so much hyperventilating about banning and freedom and other assorted idiocy. It is truly incredible, just like gun nuts in a way. Any criticism or suggestion of regulation is interpreted as gun grabbers grabbing all of teh guns!!!!!

198. Yeppers

I don't care if adults want to download videos of themselves having sex, and I don't have a problem with consensual porn where there is protection for the actors and no actual harm is done to any of them.

The "But all porn is so WHOLESOME!" argument is made moot by the fact that the gang-rape of a schoolgirl was "acceptable porn" to those who tweeted and sent out pictures of her rape.

If watching people being violently degraded is the only way I could get off, I would be pretty defensive as well.

Anone who pretends all porn is just peachy and there is nothing sick about watching the worst of it, and that "every REAL man does after all" are EXACTLY like the gun-humpers.

203. Who said "all porn is wholesome"?

You're gonna need a whole new thread, for all the made-up strawmen you're arguing with; like the one who said "every REAL man does it after all" (where is he? You know, the GUY WHO ACTUALLY SAID THAT? Is he here? In this thread?)
Nice sideways attempt at slamming DU Members, too: "If watching people being violently degraded is the only way I could get off, I would be pretty defensive as well. "

Oh, would ya? Well, harumph harumph, if watching drunken seals covered in mayonnaise, flop together at Sea World was the only way I could get off, I would probably post bitter anti-porn screeds on DU.*

*not that anyone here has actually said that's what they like. Of course.

Honestly, you owe me -or whoever that was supposed to be directed at- an apology, as far as I'm concerned, for that. Fucking -lame-. Won't hold my breath, of course.

If you were paying attention, though, the post I responded to had to do with "objectification"; point being, that finding naked humans of either gender attractive, or enjoying watching them screw (again, CONSENSUALLY, before we get derailed with nonconsensual whataboutery) is "objectification" and (presumably) that's supposed to be something bad.

I just wish the usual suspects would display some intellectual honesty and acknowledge that at the end of the day, it's the naked adults, either alone or consensually fucking, and the people who find them attractive on a VISUAL basis (for some reason it's the fact that they enjoy them VISUALLY that seems to chafe.. Hmmmmm) ... I wish they would just out with it and say, yes, that's what we have a problem with.

211. Why so defensive?

It's not worth it to get so torqued off over a post, but if it keeps you going, so be it.

My post about degrading porn, or those being abused by it, had nothing to do with you. Why would you think it did?

Guess what, Warren, every post made about porn is NOT about you, as hard as that may be to accept. Your taking it so personally is YOUR problem. And when you consistently try to derail any conversation about that kind of porn, are you trying to deny it exists? Are you trying to tell me it's healthy? Do you just want to shut your ears and go "la-la-la-la-la-la-LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU"

I can't stand the goddamned strawman that says if we complain about images - such as that of the girl raped in Steubenville - being considered "acceptable porn" we are ALSO saying "ALL PORN IS BAD."

"Ooh you just don't like seeing naked people is really your problem!" Sure. Sure, I don't How juvenile can you get, Warren?

I never said that. You know it. But if I want to interject my thoughts on that kind of porn into a thread about porn, it really pisses some people off for some reason. What ARE your thoughts on that type of porn? If you want to answer that, you would be more honest here. Yelling at me isn't going to change my opinion, neither will trying to shame me.

As for the "All real men do it," that was a summation of some of the posts on this thread, yes. No one said those actual WORDS, no, but when men have posted here- and not just in this thread - that they aren't into porn, they are often met with "Sure, buddy. We know the TRUTH and you watch it, too! Just admit it!" Like these people cannot BELIEVE someone chooses different entertainment. It's juvenile and bullying behavior.

Seriously, if you think everybody does all the same things YOU do, no deviation, you are the intolerant one.

I've stated my position many times, in this thread alone. If you are trying to argue with someone else THROUGH my post, lots of luck with that. I don't know who the "usual suspects" are of whom you speak, Adam Ant, but fight on with them somewhere else.

223. And again, straw argument. Where was it said that the shit from steubenville was "acceptable porn"?

No one has said that. Not here, not ever. Or one, its not "porn", its evidence, of a crime. Also, it allegedly contains images of someone under 18, making it illegal on a whole additional level.

Debates about "porn" - if they are intellectually honest - focus on what is out there on the web legally, IE material by and for consenting adults. It is a glaring indicator of the intellectual bankruptcy of the anti porn "arguments" that they inevitably don't proceed 10 feet before dragging in non consent, or non adults, or both-- not to mention Steubenville, which is only included in an argument about "porn" because a crime that involved sex was filmed; it bears absolutely zero relation to the universe of legal "porn", professional and amateur, available on the web.

I mean, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that, with the ready availability of smartphone cameras, teens and sociopaths who commit sick crimes will also be stupid enough to film some of them- and in this case, thats a good thing, because this "porn" you speak of is NOT going out onto the web for people to "get off on" but it will be instrumental in sending these criminals to prison.

If your question is what do I think about the Steubenville rape case, my answer is the same as it has been in the threads where the topic is actually relevant- namely, everyone involved, including accomplices who didn't try to stop it, including coaches or kocl officials who tried to over it up- should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Throw the book at them.

FWIW, I know there are men who don't watch porn. However, by most accounts, honestly, the majority do. And many women do, too.

235. Thats pretty long for a total non-answer.

202. The poster upthread is asserting that being turned on by looking at naked people = "objectification"

Presumably, that's something bad.

Just cut to the damn chase, and admit that people looking at other people, finding them sexually attractive on a VISUAL basis, and being physically turned on by them, is what's "problematic", here. Admit it. Be honest.

248. They've cured

251. Messed up study.

First of all the statement is an absolute. I guarantee there places in the world where there is just no access to it, and with men living in these places.
Second of all it's just like me saying "All women hate porn".

If " all men watch porn " were written as a conclusion in the scientist's findings then that raises the the question what else have they messed up in the study.

257. I would tend to doubt that whoever was responsible for the "research" put forth a hypothesis

intended for rigorous peer review, saying "all men watch porn".

Rather, I suspect that's the press, having a little laugh.

Also, the press is notoriously bad when it comes to mangling/getting "creative" with scientific statements and results; this is how some interesting (but admittedly not final or conclusive) data on light from 12 billion yr old quasars which could have relevance to the question of whether or not space-time is "quantum foamy" down near the Planck length, becomes "Einstein was right, quantum physics is wrong!" in Headline-speak.

258. Your probably right

and it only gets worse when it's passed around the room.

That's the first time I've heard of "quantum foamy", I read the argument of whether we have a digital or analog universe, but your saying sub atomic particles can behave in a foamy fashion the smaller you go?